Overlooked plot point/hole in the "Club Of Heroes" arc

[Red_Knight]

Hey everyone,

I just finished reading Morrison's recent "Club of Heroes" arc, and although I liked it a lot, there's something that bugs me. I'm not sure whether it's a plot point or a plot hole, but I don't think it has been resolved.

To recap what I "got", the basic story goes like this:

Mr. Mayhew fakes his death to throw off the COH. He then constructs elaborate traps and schemes to bump them off, disguised as old-school villain "El Sombrero". Wingman of the COH is in on the plan and subtly obstructs the investigation. Somewhere along the way, he, too, fakes his death and assumes the identity of Dark Ranger, whom he killed off-panel. Both guys are actually working with/for the mysterious "Black Glove", who, as far as we know, wasn't on the island when the plan went into effect.

So far so good. There is one detail that doesn't add up though. It's the scene where the Black Glove reveals himself to the COH via video message. He claims to be wearing Mr. Mayhew`s skin as a mask, -- and, judging by the artwork, he does. There are ways to explain that one, of course. Surely, a man like Mr. Mayhew could obtain a realistic-looking mask of himself to add to the theatrics.

There's one major headscratcher though: The first page of the first issue shows the Black Glove talking to and (presumably) preparing to skin a naked captive. Logically, that captive can't be Mayhew, though. He reappears unharmed at the conclusion of the arc, so we know he wasn't actually skinned; and there'd be no point in having him play the victim with no one to watch.

So, I' wondering: What's up with that? Did I miss something, did Grant slip up, or do you think that's an unresolved plot point? Was the captive someone else, maybe?

 

[Joker]

You're trying to find logic in a story arc that reintroduced the club of Batmen, and El Sombrero, by the author who reintroduced Bat-Mite...that was your first mistake

 

[Red_Knight]

You're trying to find logic in a story arc that reintroduced the club of Batmen, and El Sombrero, by the author who reintroduced Bat-Mite...that was your first mistake

LOL Not a fan of Morrison's direction, I take it? I was a long-time skeptic too. I' just now catching up on his run (He got me with the Doppelgänger Batman. I'm a sucker for evil twins, and Bats desperately needs a competent one). I think once you open your mind to his idea, it works quite nicely. Why ignore all those wacky Silver Age-stories when we can utilize new angles to fit them into the continuity and get something cool out of it?

 

[Joker]

Because, we're not getting something cool out of it. We're getting old storylines that sucked in the first place redressed and still sucking. And his storytelling is so all over the place that I cant even understand what he's trying to accomplish. He started strong, and then just sort of lost his mind with issue 666...

 

[Red_Knight]

Because, we're not getting something cool out of it. We're getting old storylines that sucked in the first place redressed and still sucking. And his storytelling is so all over the place that I cant even understand what he's trying to accomplish. He started strong, and then just sort of lost his mind with issue 666...

Give him time, dude. I`m not sure where this is going myself -- again, I just came for the Doppelgänger Batman -- but I have faith in Grant to pull off something great. His stories usually read better in one sitting. (Do you know what his overall concept is, btw? He mentioned it in an interview, and just looking at his run from THAT angle really made it great to me!)

 

[Joker]

I dropped the book after #666...I just couldnt take it anymore. I hate this trend in comics of regression. They moved Superman and Wonder Woman and Batman back to the Silver Age...they've moved Spider-Man back to the Silver Age...they're going ass-backwards, and people are eating it up for some reason...some twisted sense of nostalgia...when its doing nothing but hurting the characters in the long run. These are all stories we've already had told before, there's no reason to re-tread them.

 

[Red_Knight]

I hate this trend in comics of regression. [...] These are all stories we've already had told before, there's no reason to re-tread them.

That's what I thought, too, -- but Morrison's point is a good one. He said (paraphrasing here) that when he was put on Batman, he decided he'd treat all those old, wacky stories as canon. Quote: "What if all these things actually happened in one man's life over the course of, say, 15 years?"

Naturally, that raises the question how some of the more outlandish tales could logically fit into the pseudo-realistic continuity we know. Morrison's solution, I think, was brilliant. He validates the silver-age stories by placing them in a new context. I was never a fan of Batmite, -- but thinking of him as a nightmarish post-hypnotic suggestion embedded in Batman's mind, that's a Batmite I can love!

 

[rpenguin]

I dropped the book after #666...I just couldnt take it anymore. I hate this trend in comics of regression. They moved Superman and Wonder Woman and Batman back to the Silver Age...they've moved Spider-Man back to the Silver Age...they're going ass-backwards, and people are eating it up for some reason...some twisted sense of nostalgia...when its doing nothing but hurting the characters in the long run. These are all stories we've already had told before, there's no reason to re-tread them.

As opposed to treading new ground?

What would new ground be? Knightfall? Knightsend? Contagion? Cataclysm? No Man's Land? Fugitive/Murderer? Hush? Hush Returns? War Games? War Crimes? Red Hood?

NML and Hush probably have the most acceptance of those, but honestly, while being good ideas, they were all executed poorly. They've been cramming us with new ideas for the last fifteen years. It's about time they slowed things down and focused on cultivating the character.

 

[Kraven]

Morrison also mentioned that he would follow up on that arc with a Club of Villains arc, sometime after R.I.P. I'm guessing that was just the Black Glove testing Mayhew to see if he was committed or something, or possibly he convinced them not to skin him and that he could be a valuable part of their plan.

 

[Parents-Gun-Bat]

I still think the idea of "Batmen of All Nations" isn't that stupid. That a lot of people are inspired by Batman to fight crime is actually a good idea.

 

[RobC]

I want fresher new ideas, stop hacing a Crisis every five freakin' minutes, that gets tiring. Like we've literally just wrapped up 52 and bang, another Crisis. Give it a rest.

I'd like to see another epic along the NML line.

 

[antonydelfini]

Hey everyone,

I just finished reading Morrison's recent "Club of Heroes" arc, and although I liked it a lot, there's something that bugs me. I'm not sure whether it's a plot point or a plot hole, but I don't think it has been resolved.

To recap what I "got", the basic story goes like this:

Mr. Mayhew fakes his death to throw off the COH. He then constructs elaborate traps and schemes to bump them off, disguised as old-school villain "El Sombrero". Wingman of the COH is in on the plan and subtly obstructs the investigation. Somewhere along the way, he, too, fakes his death and assumes the identity of Dark Ranger, whom he killed off-panel. Both guys are actually working with/for the mysterious "Black Glove", who, as far as we know, wasn't on the island when the plan went into effect.

So far so good. There is one detail that doesn't add up though. It's the scene where the Black Glove reveals himself to the COH via video message. He claims to be wearing Mr. Mayhew`s skin as a mask, -- and, judging by the artwork, he does. There are ways to explain that one, of course. Surely, a man like Mr. Mayhew could obtain a realistic-looking mask of himself to add to the theatrics.

There's one major headscratcher though: The first page of the first issue shows the Black Glove talking to and (presumably) preparing to skin a naked captive. Logically, that captive can't be Mayhew, though. He reappears unharmed at the conclusion of the arc, so we know he wasn't actually skinned; and there'd be no point in having him play the victim with no one to watch.

So, I' wondering: What's up with that? Did I miss something, did Grant slip up, or do you think that's an unresolved plot point? Was the captive someone else, maybe?

Why can't the captive be Mayhew? That was definitely Mayhew, with the Black Glove intimidating him to do stuff for him like choose which he is betting on: good or evil(we still don't know who the guy is, were guessing that it's the ultimate villain according to issue 674).

What you have to understand is that there are 3 villains in that arc: Mayhew, Wingman, and the Black Glove.

As for the mask, it's fake.

 

[Red_Knight]

Why can't the captive be Mayhew? That was definitely Mayhew, with the Black Glove intimidating him to do stuff for him like choose which he is betting on: good or evil.

I realize the Black Glove has a part in this; -- I'm just saying it's logical for Mayhew to actually be the captive. He certainly doesn't seem like an unwilling, intimidated accomplice when he is revealed to be alive at the end of the arc. The way I read it, he didn't know that the Black Glove would/could blow up his island, either. He looked pretty shocked.

I thought Mayhew turned out exactly as Batman described him; -- a bored, rich man looking for some cheap thrills. I'm sure the Black Glove played him, but I don't think there's any hint that he was forced into being a bad guy.

 

[Joker]

As opposed to treading new ground?

What would new ground be? Knightfall? Knightsend? Contagion? Cataclysm? No Man's Land? Fugitive/Murderer? Hush? Hush Returns? War Games? War Crimes? Red Hood?

NML and Hush probably have the most acceptance of those, but honestly, while being good ideas, they were all executed poorly. They've been cramming us with new ideas for the last fifteen years. It's about time they slowed things down and focused on cultivating the character.

I'd rather see crappy new ideas than crappy old ideas re-done.

 

[RobC]

^ Exactly.

 

[Red_Knight]

I'd rather see crappy new ideas than crappy old ideas re-done.

What would you like, though? Not baiting, I really am curious. I mean, you can't do storylines like Knightfall, No Man's Land or Cataclysm over and over. It gets old! I mean, how often can Batman get crippled? How often can Gotham City be leveled by an earthquake or threatened by a killer virus? When do we start rolling our eyes? Suspension of disbelief can only go so far. Even gang wars can't happen all the time. They'd be meaningless after the third go-round.

 

[rpenguin]

I'd rather see crappy new ideas than crappy old ideas re-done.

That mentality made Marvel bankrupt and almost caused the comic industry to collapse.

I don't really care if you dislike what's happening, but to declare it poor regression? Batman's not turning into his silver age incarnation. Morrison is simply making those stories continuity. They HAPPENED. That's all. And it should be celebrated because talented writers worked on the character for years and it shouldn't have been for nothing.

And while the foundation of these new stories are based on old ideas, new ideas have been brought forward.
Batman having a child: we get to see a batrocket, an army of ninja-manbats, and an overall pretty exciting action story. And he ****ing finally killed off that loser, The Spook.
Club of Heroes: a critically acclaimed detective story, including backstories to a bunch of characters with nothing but a 50's image to their name. We also have a new villain to look forward.
Isolation experiment: corruption running deep in the police department and three villains
and FINALLY, a GOOD Joker story. Whether or not you like the narrative, Joker was finally captured.

In the midst of all this, Batman isn't telling off any of his teammates, he's finally getting laid, and he's out of the damn cave. Did you know he literally spent most of the early 00's in the cave? Training that worthless character, Sasha. Ugh. Or getting completely owned by Hush. Hell, from Hush until now he was just letting the villains walk all over him. And then spending countless hours ANALYSING A COFFIN.

Anyway, it's finally exciting to buy the Batman comic.

 

[Joker]

That mentality made Marvel bankrupt and almost caused the comic industry to collapse.
.

You mean like there idea of making Spider-Man be Ben Reilly, so they could regress the character to being single again? Or the idea of restarting the universe with Heroes Reborn, so they could regress all the characters to be young and just starting out again? Oh wait...that's the crappy old ideas being redone thing again that you're talking about. Not new ideas like Civil War, World War Hulk, and The Initiative, which are new and fresh, regardless of what you feel there quality is, which have all sold a crap load.

 

[rpenguin]

You mean like there idea of making Spider-Man be Ben Reilly, so they could regress the character to being single again? Or the idea of restarting the universe with Heroes Reborn, so they could regress all the characters to be young and just starting out again? Oh wait...that's the crappy old ideas being redone thing again that you're talking about. Not new ideas like Civil War, World War Hulk, and The Initiative, which are new and fresh, regardless of what you feel there quality is, which have all sold a crap load.

What are you TALKING about? Those are EVENTS happening independently (or superdependently, I suppose). But they're Marvel UNIVERSE events. There's a big difference between an arc and an event. This list here:
Knightfall? Knightsend? Contagion? Cataclysm? No Man's Land? Fugitive/Murderer? Hush? Hush Returns? War Games? War Crimes? Red Hood?

ARCS. CW and WWH are EVENTS, like Identity and Infinite and Final Crisis. Like Amazons Attack. Initiative is a TIE-in to an event.

Arcs rarely even compete with events. Arcs happen to characters and events happen to the world/universe.

And what is this? SALES = QUALITY? What? That's NUTS. WWH was a fanboy's wet dream of Hulk fighting everyone and it read like a lame episode of Dragonball Z. And heroes fighting heroes is new and fresh now?

Finally, I'm talking about NOT changing the status quo too much. I think Batman comics have been pretty cool since Red Hood/Infinite Crisis in that the status quo has been pretty relaxed. Batman's just doing his thing in the city and not caught up in some massive life-altering arc. We finally got a breather and some exploration of past events in his life. Granted, RIP is coming up, but after 2 years I'll give Grant leeway here and let him shake the status quo up. He's earned it. Plus, it's really exciting. Hell, it's supposed to be a whole new territory, exactly what you're clamouring for.

And seriously, some of the best Batbook dialogue EVER.

 

[Joker]

Civil War is an event. Infinite Crisis, which sent the entire DCU hurtling back to the silver age is an event. Marvels event is moving forward. DC's is moving backward, like Marvel did with Heroes Reborn. DC is doing the things that nearly bankrupted Marvel years ago, which is an argument you brought up. Killing "Batman" and replacing him with another, younger character like Morrison is doing? Ben Reilly Spider-Man...

 

[rpenguin]

No one knows for certain what's happening in RIP. For all we know, issue 666 was just Damien having a fantasy while his organs were being replaced.

Replacing Spiderman didn't necessarily kill the industry, it was dragging out the plot into a massive crossover that just didn't end. New ideas and new status quo's over and over without a breather because they just want bigger and bigger sales.

 

[lixdexia]

What are you TALKING about? Those are EVENTS happening independently (or superdependently, I suppose). But they're Marvel UNIVERSE events. There's a big difference between an arc and an event. This list here:
Knightfall? Knightsend? Contagion? Cataclysm? No Man's Land? Fugitive/Murderer? Hush? Hush Returns? War Games? War Crimes? Red Hood?

ARCS. CW and WWH are EVENTS, like Identity and Infinite and Final Crisis. Like Amazons Attack. Initiative is a TIE-in to an event.

Arcs rarely even compete with events. Arcs happen to characters and events happen to the world/universe.

And what is this? SALES = QUALITY? What? That's NUTS. WWH was a fanboy's wet dream of Hulk fighting everyone and it read like a lame episode of Dragonball Z. And heroes fighting heroes is new and fresh now?

Finally, I'm talking about NOT changing the status quo too much. I think Batman comics have been pretty cool since Red Hood/Infinite Crisis in that the status quo has been pretty relaxed. Batman's just doing his thing in the city and not caught up in some massive life-altering arc. We finally got a breather and some exploration of past events in his life. Granted, RIP is coming up, but after 2 years I'll give Grant leeway here and let him shake the status quo up. He's earned it. Plus, it's really exciting. Hell, it's supposed to be a whole new territory, exactly what you're clamouring for.

And seriously, some of the best Batbook dialogue EVER.

knightfall, no man's land and murderer were events, hush and under the hood were arcs. the difference is that an event occurs in several books and has an affect on all of them, while an arc happens within the same title and can sometimes be completely ignored by the other titles.

i have to agree with the joker on this one, while i do enjoy rehashings of old tales from time to time, i also enjoy evolution and devlopment in the characters. leave the re-hashes to the non continuity books like all-star and classified and let the main books change over time.

 

[rpenguin]

knightfall, no man's land and murderer were events, hush and under the hood were arcs. the difference is that an event occurs in several books and has an affect on all of them, while an arc happens within the same title and can sometimes be completely ignored by the other titles.

Actually, they're crossovers. I realized after I posted it, but I let it go because crossovers still aren't technically events, quite in the sense that "The Joker" mentioned, WWH and CW.

But BS semantics aside, the universe stories in their own mini/maxi series get way more press.

 

[lixdexia]

Actually, they're crossovers. I realized after I posted it, but I let it go because crossovers still aren't technically events, quite in the sense that "The Joker" mentioned, WWH and CW.

But BS semantics aside, the universe stories in their own mini/maxi series get way more press.

because more press= better quality

 

[RobC]

Um, firstly that's not semantics, semantics is basically semiotics, which is how things are placed in frame in a movie to get a certain response.

Secondly, and I know this may sound condescending, but you really need to chill out, you've been on the boards for like six months, and you're talking to two of the most established posters like they're children.

Finally, you must be one of the only people who's enjoying Morrison's arc. He's bringing things into continuity that didn't need to be brought in. We know Bat-Mite existed, and we know that talented writers worked on those stories, doesn't mean that they need to be brought into the modern comics. Why not bring in The Clock King, King Tut and Egghead while were at it?

See, your logic is flawed, and whilst you make interesting arguments you compare modern DC to past Marvel which is self-defeating because DC will have learnt from the mistakes of others. No-one wants another Crisis, it's pointless, everyone wants new, exciting, bold stories. They also want new arcs/events such as NML, because that's what keeps us interested.

Bottom line, Morrisons run has been haphazard at best, I don't think i've seen more than ten positive comments about it since it started, and that says a hell of a lot.